Why Ron Paul Can Never Be President In 12 Quotes

Ron Paul is doing surprisingly well this year in some of the early primary state polls. There’s a simple reason for that: Most people in the conservative media have concluded he can’t win the nomination, they don’t want to get yelled at by his supporters, and so they’ve laid off of him while most of the other candidates have had to face ferocious criticism. I’d be content to ignore Paul, too, except for the fact that there’s an outside chance he could win Iowa, which is of course, perfectly #%$^ ridiculous. Why is that ridiculous?

Ron Paul is absolutely, unconditionally unelectable. By that, I mean that Barack Obama would have a genuine shot to beat Ron Paul in all 50 states, including Texas and Utah. If Hillary Clinton ran as a third party candidate, Obama would still probably take more than 40 states against Paul. If Obama DIED with 3 months left in the election and his campaign was suspended, he’d PROBABLY STILL beat Paul by a margin larger than the one he had against McCain in 2008.

Now, you may be saying, “How can this be? Paul loves the Constitution! He’s fiscally conservative! He raises money! He has dedicated fans! I agree with him on so many things!”

Setting aside the fact that Ron Paul already ran for President on the Libertarian ticket in 1988 and only pulled .47% of the vote, he’s made a lot of comments that would scare the ever living hell out of most Americans. All Obama would have to do to beat Paul is run ad after ad featuring the things Paul has said and his victory would be guaranteed. Yes, people really don’t like Obama and they would agree with Paul about a lot of things, but the American people would rather have a bad President than one they believe is an unstable radical. Read these quotes, imagine all of them being hammered home and twisted for months by the Obama campaign and its allies in the mainstream media, and you’ll see why Ron Paul will never be President of the United States.

1) On Leaving the Republican Party in Reagan’s Last Year of Office, 1988

I want to totally disassociate myself from the policies that have given us unprecedented deficits, massive monetary inflation, indiscriminate military spending, an irrational and unconstitutional foreign policy, zooming foreign aid, the exaltation of international banking, and the attack on our personal liberties and privacy.

After years of trying to work through the Republican Party both in and out of government, I have reluctantly concluded that my efforts must be carried on outside the Republican Party. Republicans know that the Democratic agenda is dangerous to our political and economic health. Yet, in the past six years Republicans have expanded its worst aspects and called them our own. The Republican Party has not reduced the size of government. It has become big government’s best friend.

If Ronald Reagan couldn’t or wouldn’t balance the budget, which Republican leader on the horizon can we possibly expect to do so? There is no credibility left for the Republican Party as a force to reduce the size of government. That is the message of the Reagan years.

I conclude that one must look to other avenues if a successful effort is ever to be achieved in reversing America’s direction.

According to the US government website dedicated to the project, the SPP is neither a treaty nor a formal agreement. Rather, it is a “dialogue” launched by the heads of state of Canada, Mexico, and the United States at a summit in Waco, Texas in March, 2005. What is a “dialogue”? We don’t know. What we do know, however, is that Congressional oversight of what might be one of the most significant developments in recent history is non-existent. Congress has had no role at all in a “dialogue” that many see as a plan for a North American union.

3) On the 9/11 Truther Conspiracy

CALLER: I want a complete, impartial, and totally independent investigation of the events of September 11, 2001. I’m tired of this bogus garbage about terrorism. Ask Michael Meacher about how he feels about this bogus war on terrorism. Can you comment on that please?

HON. DR. RON PAUL: Well, that would be nice to have. Unfortunately, we don’t have that in place. It will be a little bit better now with the Democrats now in charge of oversight. But you know, for top level policy there’s not a whole lot of difference between the two policies so a real investigation isn’t going to happen. But I think we have to keep pushing for it. And like you and others, we see the investigations that have been done so far as more or less cover-up and no real explanation of what went on.

I don’t think he was one of our greatest presidents. I mean, he was determined to fight a bloody civil war, which many have argued could have been avoided. For 1/100 the cost of the war, plus 600 thousand lives, enough money would have been available to buy up all the slaves and free them. So, I don’t see that is a good part of our history. Besides, the Civil War was to prove that we had a very, very strong centralized federal government and that’s what it did. It rejected the notion that states were a sovereign nation.

6) Ron Paul On the Civil Rights Act of 1964

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 not only violated the Constitution and reduced individual liberty; it also failed to achieve its stated goals of promoting racial harmony and a color-blind society. Federal bureaucrats and judges cannot read minds to see if actions are motivated by racism. Therefore, the only way the federal government could ensure an employer was not violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was to ensure that the racial composition of a business’s workforce matched the racial composition of a bureaucrat or judge’s defined body of potential employees. Thus, bureaucrats began forcing employers to hire by racial quota. Racial quotas have not contributed to racial harmony or advanced the goal of a color-blind society. Instead, these quotas encouraged racial balkanization, and fostered racial strife.

Interviewer: …In the last interview we did with a Libertarian candidate for President, he said you that would abolish the CIA, the FBI, and the IRS. Do you hold those same positions?

Ron Paul: Yes, I do — because you know, most of our history, we didn’t have those institutions.

10) On the Border Fence

The people that want big fences and guns, sure, we could secure the border. A barbed wire fence with machine guns, that would do the trick. I don’t believe that is what America is all about. Every time you think about this toughness on the border and ID cards and REAL IDs, think it’s a penalty against the American people too. I think this fence business is designed and may well be used against us and keep us in. In economic turmoil, the people want to leave with their capital and there’s capital controls and there’s people controls. Every time you think about the fence, think about the fences being used against us, keeping us in.

11) Social Security and Medicare

WALLACE: You talk a lot about the Constitution. You say Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid are all unconstitutional.
PAUL: Technically, they are. … There’s no authority [in the Constitution]. Article I, Section 8 doesn’t say I can set up an insurance program for people. What part of the Constitution are you getting it from? The liberals are the ones who use this General Welfare Clause. … That is such an extreme liberal viewpoint that has been mistaught in our schools for so long and that’s what we have to reverse–that very notion that you’re presenting.
WALLACE: Congressman, it’s not just a liberal view. It was the decision of the Supreme Court in 1937 when they said that Social Security was constitutional under Article I, Section 8 of the Constitution.
PAUL: And the Constitution and the courts said slavery was legal too, and we had to reverse that.

12) Legalizing Heroin and Cocaine

Q: You say that the federal government should stay out of people’s personal habits, including marijuana, cocaine, even heroin.A: It’s an issue of protecting liberty across the board. If you have the inconsistency, then you’re really not defending liberty. We want freedom [including] when it comes to our personal habits.Q: Are you suggesting that heroin and prostitution are an exercise of liberty?A: Yes, in essence, if we leave it to the states. For over 100 years, they WERE legal. You’re implying if we legalize heroin tomorrow, everyone’s gonna use heroin.How many people here are going to use heroin if it were legal? I bet nobody! “Oh yeah, I need the government to take care of me. I don’t want to use heroin, so I need these laws!”